The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-05-15
The English Comm,ssionsrs'P Pro O.
StttOn.

Richmond Wing: TIE proposition
OF the commissioners on the part of
he bondholders for the sett 'ement of
the State debt is very remarkable
one, and the impo sibility of the
s ate's accepting such terms becomes
more apparent the more thoroughly
the mat,er 10 considered. Ii the
amount OF interest 70 bs paid annually
alone c nsidersd, the proposition
dees not Seem 30 unressoL able, but
when We look to see how that sum is
arrived a, and consider the terms and
conditions connected with the offer,
then its ureasonableness become ap-
parent. In the first place, the sum of
500, 1897 900 is not the real principal of
the debt up IN the basis OF which the
settlement 10 proposed, as it az first
sppears, but the amount is S34,
600, or the full amount OF the debt as
Iecogniz ID under the funding bill OF
1871. From this smount
the English commissioners ar
bit arily strike $7,5i0,O00 being the
bonds belonging to the literary fund,
the sinking fund the Board Of Public
Works, the debt due to the Vnitsd
Saes, and 10 per cent of the whoe
dedt of the State, which they guess
has been lost, and therefore which
they think toe State will never be
called on to pay. So 3 per cent. upon
the real principal, which the p,opo-
sition recpgniz ,s is not 1866 600, but
$l,03l,94 The bondholders simply
say the State must pay them interest
on the full amount of their bonds,
said interest amounting to $S06,0 900,
but she need not pay the other 1926.
$40 due on the other bonds, which
they excluded from their ca culation.
This is sheer presumption on lhs part
of the boudholders, as they have no
right to dictate to the State what ahe
sal do with the bonds belonging 10
the literary fund or the sinking fund,
which are provided .or By the
constitution, to be, devoted to
the purposes ef education
and the extinction of the debt. It is
true the commissioners did fiaally
egree to allow the literary fund to
come in for it's proportionhte share Of
the interest, but they persisted In ex
Guiding the sinking fund and the 9TH
er items above mentioned. 0lher IN
ditions which the Sta.e could not COM
ply with are the payment of 81, 002, 900
in ga h and all the expenses incurred,
or to be incurred In connection with
the present neRoliatione, and that an
agreement that after two years no
bonds shall be fu1de by the State ex-
Cept WITH the consent OF the council Of |
reign bondholders. And, moreover,
the amount OF interest to be paid them
annually would remain at $500 900 for
only five years, after which time the
State would have to pay 81 ,075, 480 an
nually, or 4 per cent. upon $26,
0C0. Another strong obi lection is that
the new bonds ara to bear tax re ceiv-
able coupons, aud be exempt from all
taxa ion, State, county and corpora
ton. The latter condition nigh be
accepted if that were the only obj c.
ton, but the tax receivable coupon
feature, we believe, would dafeat the
before the people If tue
legislature we're to agree to it. So,
when we C nsider all these things TO-
pether, it becomes apparent that the
joint committee of the Legs aturs
sottd right in PROMPTLY rejecting the
of the Eoglish Commits
81 nera. II they had done otherwise
they would have been exscr0ted
throughout the length and breadth OF
he State.